PE Stamping with customer specification

[aNerdyEngineer]

I am a rookie PE (obtained in January) and am now asked to use my license to use for the first time by designing electrical drawings that are similar to another job. I have a large government specification that asks to meet certain restrictions. One example here is meeting IEEE 519. I don't believe our equipment will meet this, but I don't necessarily see a safety hazard associated with not meeting IEEE 519. Does part of stamping a job as a PE take into account customers' wishes or am I just to hold strict to code - UL508A and NEC with safety taken into account? Forgive my ignorance.

 

[gadfly56]

I am a rookie PE (obtained in January) and am now asked to use my license to use for the first time by designing electrical drawings that are similar to another job. I have a large government specification that asks to meet certain restrictions. One example here is meeting IEEE 519. I don't believe our equipment will meet this, but I don't necessarily see a safety hazard associated with not meeting IEEE 519. Does part of stamping a job as a PE take into account customers' wishes or am I just to hold strict to code - UL508A and NEC with safety taken into account? Forgive my ignorance.

If the specifications are part of the contract and are stricter than the code, you follow the specifications. If you are pretty sure that your equipment can't meet the spec, stop right there and have a sit down with the customer to determine if he really needs it or someone "ragged and tagged" the spec (boilerplate). You may not yet fully appreciate that as a PE, when you're working on a customer's project, you work for him, not your company, in terms of to whom you owe fiduciary responsibility. That can put you between a rock and a hard place, but that's the way it is.

 

[Ingenieur]

if the client gives you specs and expects compliant docs in return, and you seal it, they have every right to expect it to comply
sit down and discuss it with them
especially a gov contract

 

[charlie b]

I am a rookie PE (obtained in January). . . .

Congratulations. Welcome to the club.

Does part of stamping a job as a PE take into account customers' wishes or am I just to hold strict to code?

My answers are "no" and "no," in that order.

I will say this for your benefit, but also as a message to all possible readers of this thread. It is something I have said before, and will likely say again, for it is worth repeating. When a PE seals and signs a document, that act asserts nothing whatsoever about compliance with codes, contractual obligations, or customer wishes. Nothing! The seal and signature comprise a single declaration, and nothing other than that declaration. They declare to the world that, "This work was done by me or under my supervision."

Now, what you, as a licensed member of the engineering profession, wish to do, before you are willing to make that declaration, whether it be related to customer wishes, or code requirements, or anything else, is a personal choice.

Forgive my ignorance.

Learning is a life-long journey. There is nothing to forgive.

 

[drktmplr12]

When a PE seals and signs a document, that act asserts nothing whatsoever about compliance with codes, contractual obligations, or customer wishes. Nothing! The seal and signature comprise a single declaration, and nothing other than that declaration. They declare to the world that, "This work was done by me or under my supervision."

Now, what you, as a licensed member of the engineering profession, wish to do, before you are willing to make that declaration, whether it be related to customer wishes, or code requirements, or anything else, is a personal choice.
Learning is a life-long journey. There is nothing to forgive.

Very well said.

Regarding 519 compliance, it would be beneficial to meet with the customer to discuss what compliance means, what it costs and what the risks of non-compliance are. Determining the probability of the risks might not be practical.

The conversation might might like this:

You: My professional opinion is that this installation should comply with 519.
Owner: What is 519?
You: It is the Recommended Practice and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electric Power Systems. It states the users of electricity should limit their harmonic contribution to the utility grid to prescribed values.
Owner: How much more will it cost me?
You: 1 billion, sir
Owner: That's too much, do I have to?
You: No. The risks are x, y and z.
Owner: (thinks) I am willing to take those risks.
You: Okay I will prepare meeting minutes and specify non-compliant equipment.

All of that said,
input line reactors shouldn't cost too much and usually provide compliance with 519. If you are going 18-pulse for large loads, that is another story.

 

[petersonra]

I am a rookie PE (obtained in January) and am now asked to use my license to use for the first time by designing electrical drawings that are similar to another job. I have a large government specification that asks to meet certain restrictions. One example here is meeting IEEE 519. I don't believe our equipment will meet this, but I don't necessarily see a safety hazard associated with not meeting IEEE 519. Does part of stamping a job as a PE take into account customers' wishes or am I just to hold strict to code - UL508A and NEC with safety taken into account? Forgive my ignorance.

As a practical matter, your company is contractually bound to meet all the requirements of the contract your company signed with the customer.

The color it is painted is likely not a safety issue, but if the customer wants it painted pink and it is in the contract agreed to by your company, you are contractually bound to paint it pink.

Not everything is about whether it is "safe", or meets some code or standard. The customer has the right to get what he paid for.

 

[gadfly56]

Very well said.

Regarding 519 compliance, it would be beneficial to meet with the customer to discuss what compliance means, what it costs and what the risks of non-compliance are. Determining the probability of the risks might not be practical.

The conversation might might like this:

You: My professional opinion is that this installation should comply with 519.
Owner: What is 519?
You: It is the Recommended Practice and Requirements for Harmonic Control in Electric Power Systems. It states the users of electricity should limit their harmonic contribution to the utility grid to prescribed values.
Owner: How much more will it cost me?
You: 1 billion, sir
Owner: That's too much, do I have to?
You: No. The risks are x, y and z.
Owner: (thinks) I am willing to take those risks.
You: Okay I will prepare meeting minutes and specify non-compliant equipment.

All of that said,
input line reactors shouldn't cost too much and usually provide compliance with 519. If you are going 18-pulse for large loads, that is another story.

Nice conversation, except the 519 requirement is owner driven. The OP's equipment doesn't comply. The OP is going to have to beg for a release from the requirements.

 

[drktmplr12]

Nice conversation, except the 519 requirement is owner driven. The OP's equipment doesn't comply. The OP is going to have to beg for a release from the requirements.

Fair point. I understands its part of the owner's specs. The chances the Owner knows what their requirement document says or means by 519 compliance is low.

For example, if the OP has to specify a sole provider of a piece of equipment that doesn't comply, then an external device is required. The OP can specify whatever equipment within the constraints of his or her contract with the owner to meet 519. Not sure why OP feels the equipment won't comply. Compliance with 519 is fairly simple granted there is floor space to do it. If there isn't floor space, mount something outside. If you don't want it outside, build a building. Don't like any of those options, relax the requirement. Just sayin.

that's why they should raise the concern with the owner.

 

[aNerdyEngineer]

Thanks everyone! Insight is much appreciated.

 

[gadfly56]

Fair point. I understands its part of the owner's specs. The chances the Owner knows what their requirement document says or means by 519 compliance is low.

For example, if the OP has to specify a sole provider of a piece of equipment that doesn't comply, then an external device is required. The OP can specify whatever equipment within the constraints of his or her contract with the owner to meet 519. Not sure why OP feels the equipment won't comply. Compliance with 519 is fairly simple granted there is floor space to do it. If there isn't floor space, mount something outside. If you don't want it outside, build a building. Don't like any of those options, relax the requirement. Just sayin.

that's why they should raise the concern with the owner.

Yes, that right there. You're right, legacy specifications can originate from either side of the fence.

 

[Besoeker]

All of that said,
input line reactors shouldn't cost too much and usually provide compliance with 519. If you are going 18-pulse for large loads, that is another story.

I'm not sure that they would.
Perhaps we need to know something about the application the OP did the design for.

 

[steve66]

I'm not sure that they would.
Perhaps we need to know something about the application the OP did the design for.

I would also like to know why you (meaning ANerdyEngineer) think it won't comply? Are there a lot of VFD's? Do you have to consider the owners plug loads, like all the computers they will plug in?

Also, for 519, the point of common coupling (PCC) makes a lot of difference. If its on the secondary of a transformer, its a little tougher. If its on the primary of a Delta to Wye transformer, the harmonics are a lot lower.

I've only had to do this once, and I found an online excel sheet from a VFD company that I used for the calculations. The hardest part was trying to find typical harmonics for computers, and trying to decide how many computers the user would install. (I didn't have many other nonlinear loads.)

 

[Besoeker]

I would also like to know why you (meaning ANerdyEngineer) think it won't comply?

Decades of experience.

 

[Besoeker]

Yes, that right there. You're right, legacy specifications can originate from either side of the fence.

And, in my experience at least, often include unnecessary or irrelevant clauses.
I wonder if the OP might fill us in with a bit more detail on his project?

 

[Ingenieur]

in pa the code of ethics is part of the law
if the client specs certain requirements and you seal the dwgs without them, that is not being a faithful agent
he has every right to believe you complied with his requirements

Engineers shall approve only those engineering documents that are in conformity with applicable standards.
if the owner specs a std it's applicable
this also means you are obligated to comply with codes, nec, etc

 

[Sierrasparky]

When a PE seals and signs a document, that act asserts nothing whatsoever about compliance with codes, contractual obligations, or customer wishes. Nothing! The seal and signature comprise a single declaration, and nothing other than that declaration. They declare to the world that, "This work was done by me or under my supervision."

Really, Where do you get that from. If your documents are incorrect and the result is that someone will have to pay your Errors and Omissions insurance will be paying!

That is my rub with Engineers. Everyone that pays for a set of engineered plans expects them to be compliant.

 

[Ingenieur]

Congratulations. Welcome to the club.

My answers are "no" and "no," in that order.

I will say this for your benefit, but also as a message to all possible readers of this thread. It is something I have said before, and will likely say again, for it is worth repeating. When a PE seals and signs a document, that act asserts nothing whatsoever about compliance with codes, contractual obligations, or customer wishes. Nothing! The seal and signature comprise a single declaration, and nothing other than that declaration. They declare to the world that, "This work was done by me or under my supervision."

respectfully, that makes no sense at all
it is a professional relationship and a commercial one

if the client asks for factory and gives specs and you design a garage and bill for it that is a violation of engineering and contract law

not sure why you would think you can ignore code and the client's direction assuming it's legal and code compliant)
well I guess you can but will suffer the consequences

 

[petersonra]

respectfully, that makes no sense at all
it is a professional relationship and a commercial one

if the client asks for factory and gives specs and you design a garage and bill for it that is a violation of engineering and contract law

not sure why you would think you can ignore code and the client's direction assuming it's legal and code compliant)
well I guess you can but will suffer the consequences

I think in a broad way he is probably right about what the sealing means. It just means the PE is taking responsibility for what is under his seal. It is not a declaration that he made no mistakes or applied any particular code or specification.

 

[charlie b]

Bob is right. I have no desire to ignore code or contract clauses or client desires. I would not seal and sign a document unless I was confident that it met all requirements. I stand by my earlier statement. But let me expand on it a bit.

The seal and signature means:

• This work was done by me or under my supervision, and so therefore,
• If it does not meet code, take me to task for the error, and
• If it does not meet contract requirements, take me to task for the error, and
• If it does not meet client expectations, take me to task for the error, and finally
• By sealing and signing this document, I hereby give up any possibility of shifting the blame onto anyone else.

Does that make sense?

 

[Sierrasparky]

Bob is right. I have no desire to ignore code or contract clauses or client desires. I would not seal and sign a document unless I was confident that it met all requirements. I stand by my earlier statement. But let me expand on it a bit.

The seal and signature means:

• This work was done by me or under my supervision, and so therefore,
• If it does not meet code, take me to task for the error, and
• If it does not meet contract requirements, take me to task for the error, and
• If it does not meet client expectations, take me to task for the error, and finally
• By sealing and signing this document, I hereby give up any possibility of shifting the blame onto anyone else.

Does that make sense?

Yes that makes much more sense